The Impact of Male Genital Dermatology in the Field of Andrology

Clicks: 10
ID: 333535
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #239 of 245 articles by views in clinical and experimental dermatology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 245 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Background Male genital dermatological conditions occupy a distinct clinical space at the intersection of dermatology and andrology. For much of the last century they were managed in isolation, often without accurate diagnosis, with surgery as the default response to anatomical sequelae. Over the past three decades, advances in male genital dermatology have fundamentally changed this landscape, with direct and measurable consequences for urological and andrological practice. Objectives To review the impact of advances in male genital dermatology on the management of male genital lichen sclerosus (MGLSc), penile intraepithelial neoplasia (PeIN), penile squamous cell carcinoma (PSCC), and selected rare genital conditions, with a focus on how dermatological insights have altered urological and andrological practice. Methods A review of the published literature was performed, incorporating primary studies, systematic reviews, clinical guidelines, and expert consensus documents relevant to male genital dermatology and its interface with andrology and urology. Results Dermatological investigation established chronic occluded urinary exposure as the fundamental driver of MGLSc, providing the mechanistic basis for circumcision as definitive treatment where medical therapy fails. The refutation of HPV, Borrelia, and autoimmunity as aetiological agents, the characterisation of the LSc–dPeIN–PSCC carcinogenic sequence, and the reclassification of Zoon’s balanitis as a manifestation of MGLSc have each had specific consequences for clinical decision making. The introduction of dermoscopy has improved lesion assessment and reduced unnecessary biopsy. An understanding of the triphasic age distribution of MGLSc, its association with urological procedures, and the psychosexual burden it imposes all reflect dermatologically derived knowledge with direct andrological and urological application. In rare conditions including penile melanoma, pseudoepitheliomatous keratotic and micaceous balanitis, and penoscrotal extramammary Paget’s disease, multidisciplinary input from dermatology has improved diagnostic accuracy and reduced surgical morbidity. Conclusions Advances in male genital dermatology have transformed the understanding, diagnosis, and management of male genital disease. Shared surveillance between dermatology and andrology, with agreed thresholds for surgical escalation, offers the most effective model of care and the greatest potential for organ preservation, prevention of malignant transformation, and improvement in quality of life.
Reference Key
openalex_W7223252601 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Mahmoud Ziada, Asıf Muneer
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal clinical and experimental dermatology
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/ced/llag448
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/ced/llag448
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.